Cited by 2Labor market dynamics and wage inequalityDigital Economy and Work TransformationCorporate Management and Leadership

Collaborative Work Management Technologies and Managerial Intensity in U.S. Corporations: An Examination

Gulati, Piyush, Marchetti, Arianna, Puranam, Phanish·2026·Management Science

Abstract

Do digital technologies reinforce managerial hierarchies or, instead, make them less relevant? We propose that the answer to this question depends on the nature of the technology: specifically, its relative impact on managers’ capacity to supervise and on subordinates’ need for supervision. Applying this framework to collaborative work management (CWM) technologies that facilitate real-time collaboration, communication, and task coordination, we predict that the adoption of such technologies should reduce managerial intensity and increase decentralization in organizations. To test this prediction, we use a difference-in-differences design on a novel data set built from over 26 million job listings (Lightcast) and over 20 million social profiles (Revelio) matched to 3,017 U.S. public firms in Compustat, which we track over the period from 2010 to 2019. We find that over the observation window, CWM technology adopters show a 3% reduction in managerial intensity and a 5%–7% increase in nonmanagerial skills linked to decentralization in their job postings in the years following adoption. The pattern of results is robust to a battery of validations, alternative measures, and specifications, and it strongly supports the idea that these technologies enable collaboration and make organizations less hierarchical along the dimensions that we studied. This paper was accepted by Sameer Srivastava, organizations. Funding: P. Gulati acknowledges financial support from the UCL School of Management, the Ian Potter ‘93 PhD Award at INSEAD, and the Will Mitchell Dissertation Research Grant. P. Puranam acknowledges financial support from the Desmarais Fund at INSEAD for the Organizations & Algorithms Project. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.04127 .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.2023.04127

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Authors
Gulati, P., Marchetti, A., & Puranam, P.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Singapore Management University (SG)
  • INSEAD (SG)
Venue
Management Science
Published
2026-11
Volume
72
Issue
11
Pages
9584-9608
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W7139935458
Cited by
2
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2
FWCI
9.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Management Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Corporate Management and Leadership
Keywords
organizational hierarchy, decentralization, real-time collaboration, technology adoption, job advertisements, managerial supervision, task coordination, digital technologies in organizations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review